The issue of taking disbelievers as allies, and the discussion of using the statement of the Exalted, “And whoever among you takes them as allies, then he is one of them,” as evidence

The Shaykh : Do you remember that the discussion ended yesterday with your citing as evidence the statement of the Blessed and Exalted: . You cited this noble verse as evidence that taking disbelievers as allies is practical disbelief and, at the same time, apostasy from the religion. And I said, in order to connect what has passed with what follows, I said: This noble verse is not an explicit text regarding the declaration of disbelief of one who takes disbelievers as allies; that is, by expelling him from the religion. Rather, it explicitly states: “he is one of them.” And I reminded you of some texts that are not hidden from you, such as this verse: , , . There are many hadiths, perhaps some scholars have collected them in an article or a specific study.
Yes?

Another questioner : ... .

The Shaykh: Yes.
So the point is, and in my belief, no Muslim believes that all these texts mean “he is one of them” in the sense of creed; that is, that these people whom the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) grouped with the polytheists and disbelievers are to be treated as disbelievers. So , and , no one has said: These are disbelievers from among the Muslims. And I believe you are among those who hold this view. So how do you interpret the verse on its apparent meaning—for example—saying: , meaning apostasy? And there is no such interpretation for the other texts, such as his statement (peace and blessings be upon him): ?!
I want to understand your exact opinion regarding how you deal with such texts that share the same expression but differ in their application to individuals, given the various actions that distance them from their religion.

The questioner : ... Professor, we would like to ask you; let us return to the beginning of the discussion.

The Shaykh : Pardon me.

The questioner: Because I have observations that did not come to me truly except throughout the night and thinking—may Allah will it—about an action when I asked my first question, or when I asked the first question I said... about an action that a person believes in with his heart while he is a believer, and he performs this action while he is a disbeliever, is that so? That is, in his heart he has the creed of a believer, and he performed an action of disbelief by which he exited the religion.

The Shaykh: No, I did not ask you that.

The questioner: I told you: Give me an example of a person who exits tawhid (the oneness of Allah) while in his heart he is a believer.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : Yes?

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: By an action.

The Shaykh: By an action.

The questioner: Up to this point, I mean.

The Shaykh: By an action.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: I will give one example now.

The Shaykh: If you permit.

The questioner: Go ahead.

The Shaykh: In this manner, the discussion between us will not be completed. If you allow me to finish my speech, half of the speech has no answer.
We asked you for an example, and you brought up the topic of prostrating to an idol, and we discussed it, and it became clear that it is not a suitable example. So if we continue the discussion today and it occurs to you a topic related to a second witness for the first discussion, this will become a vicious circle with no end for us; therefore, we have reached the verse. You opened the book and cited the verse as evidence.

The questioner: A negator of the negators of the two testimonies of faith.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner: And you considered wrong those who...

The Shaykh: Please allow me, for we want to continue the topic where we left off.

The questioner: Excellent, if Allah—Mighty and Majestic—causes a person who did not remember to remember things he had forgotten, based on the original discussion which he did not cite, is there any harm or, I mean, is it forbidden to start, as long as everyone wants the truth and does not want to impose an opinion without evidence?

The Shaykh: Professor, there is no harm from the Sharia perspective, but in terms of organizing the discussion—may Allah bless you—... we have not clarified the statement of our opinion or your opinion regarding what we concluded.

Another questioner: If you please... I mean, because this narration remains a doubt in his mind.

The Shaykh: Which narration?

Another questioner: ... the narration he wants to bring, or the examples that...

The Shaykh: This is an example, yes.

Another questioner: It remains a doubt in his mind.

The Shaykh: Yes.

Another questioner: Perhaps—may Allah will it—by analyzing this narration to its reality, its error will become clear.

The Shaykh: I have no objection, Professor, but I draw attention to the fact that I said yesterday—for example—I proposed that if I say to you: Is this person a believer or a monotheist, or a disbeliever? What is... that he brings me the evidence for the answer that will come at the end, but rather he says to me: Believer or disbeliever. If we agree, there is no need for evidence, and if we disagree, he cites the evidence for what he says. And you actually saw that when he said: This is a monotheist; there was no need for evidence. The professor agreed when he saw the proposal was in its place, and... in this regard, I am not one who objects to him giving one, two, or three examples, but this is not organization in the discussion. So I say: We have reached the verse, and we realized the time was the time of Maghrib prayer, we prayed and you left without understanding what your answer was regarding this verse, and the hadiths we mentioned yesterday and repeated now. There is no objection now to giving us the answer to what we directed to you yesterday, and after that he can present the first, second, and third example; I have no objection. For the sake of what? The continuity of the discussion.

Another questioner : ... correct ... .

The Shaykh: Is there an objection to this?

Another questioner: The one who wants to raise it is based on something we want in the future, let us see what it is? That is, the thing in itself, or the examples he wants to bring may have a goal, the thing that... and the thing he wants to bring; because we do not deny.

The Shaykh: Professor, you say: It may be and it may not be; this does not benefit us anything.

Another questioner: It may not be, if it is interpreted and defined and... and the truth is with one of you, we will concede... I mean, if he sees any flaw in it, he wants... continue.

The Shaykh: I say: I am not objecting to the Shaykh bringing an example or more, but I hope, especially since the discussion has reached what it ended with yesterday, that he gives us his understanding of the topic of in all that has come in text; whether it is a verse or a hadith. After that, he returns to your previous question with an example as explained, or I do not repeat; I have no objection at all. But why are we wasting our time now? Why don't we complete the discussion? Now he must have an opinion, he has an answer regarding “he is one of them” in the verse, in the hadith, in another hadith, and so on. He has an answer; if he wishes, he will summarize, if he wishes, he will return to present the example he saw yesterday while thinking at night, and if he wishes, he will do what he wishes; I am not controlling him, but the organization of the discussion requires it. And we have now linked the discussion to its end yesterday, that he says: My answer to in the hadith, in another hadith, such and such and such. So either we agree—also—as we agreed in many points, even though they are not in the core of the topic, but in any case, as preliminaries, they are good, or we disagree and each presents his proof.
So in summary: I have no objection to the professor presenting an example or more regarding the previous question, but I prefer that the best and most organized and closest to understanding is that he gives us his opinion on the meaning of the verse: “he is one of them,” and the meaning of the hadith: , and the other hadiths that are in its meaning.

Another questioner : ... .
...